Nationals - Where to after? Keeping running the workout and see if I can make any more training gains.

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Nationals - Where to after? Keeping running the workout and see if I can make any more training gains."

Neal McDaniel
5 years ago
Views:

1 Planning Bondarchuk programming for sprint/hurdling - This is meditating, helping me to not think too much with current training, and how much I despise it right now. Nationals - Where to after? Keeping running the workout and see if I can make any more training gains. The Monday after nationals, I will start this. I feel that I have accumulated a lot of training in the past 5 months, that it will be a waste if I don t see a gain of at least 3%. Even if I go through a full taper for nationals, I feel like I still have enough stress to make a good recovery. That s why I want to come back from the weekend, and see whether I can get more adaptation. If I train for 5 months, and I only gain 1%, ( ), I wasted at least 12 weeks. I don t believe that my training has gone to waste though. Even Boo says, we need to trust the amount of preparation. Even when you unload, you have a lot to tap into. Detraining doesn t happen that fast, especially if you ve really done your homework (I have done my homework). It s possible that I m starting the recovery process (cutting volume, increasing density) too late, but it can still happen. This is the test for it. There will be two programs: 1&2. The first one is the workout I ve been doing for a long time now. Since it s not possible doing this more than 2x a week, I need to fill off days, to recover. It will be Abadjiev style. PDSF0.5 Program 1: W/u + 2 runs + 1 spike + 1 spike block 1-1h, 2-2h, 1-3h, 1x353h 6x2 sn, 5x4jsq, 4x4 bench GSx15 Program 2: W/u + 2 runs + 1 spike + 1 spike block 4x5h 80% drill GSx15 Finishing the indoor season PDSF0.5 Based on feel When feel good (know when spikes If spikes on, still don t feel good are on) Program 1 2 After all, let s not waste time til May. It s perfect time to play around with the Bondarchuk system now. Expectations: M T W TH F S SUN

2 After PDSF0.5, I will be running the first Wash Cycle, to prepare physically for PDSF1. WC (Wash Cycle) a. Knee lift warm up (Tony Holler style) b. Parts program (PP) (4x through is possible in one workout) 1. block-4h (2 in) 2. circuit (50-80reps?) a. push up (12) b. ab (12) c. knee; squat (12) d. hip; hinge (12) 3. dyn. Mob circuit (Boo) c. 6 sessions*4 parts = 24 parts. Is that enough? Maybe 6-8 sessions, see if that works. 8sx4p=32parts. Easy (Not dense): (1, 1, Off) (4 in 1 week) M T W TH F S SUN PP PP OFF OFF PP PP OFF OR Easy (Not dense) (1, Off, 1, Off) (4 in 1 week) Day PP Off PP Or Herculean effort (Very Dense) (7 in 1 week) M T W TH F S SUN (AM) PP PP OFF PP PP OFF PP (PM) OFF PP OFF OFF PP OFF OFF *would want to try this to see if (on, very on, off) scheme is doable. If not doable for this with only 4 CE reps, not doable for PDSF. Developmental Cycle (PDSF) A. 2 programs B. emphasis on sprinting capacity C. specific measurable will be: i. hurdle run time ii. hurdle interval time iii. fly 10m / fly 20m / accel (mid-end) time (ie m)

3 Program 1: Sprint CE 6x30m sprint SDE 3x10m heavy sled run SPE 3x2 snatch (daily max) 4x4 hurdle hop 3x2 heavy squat GE Warm up (8x30m knee lifts) GS circuit x15 Program 2: Sprint Hurdling CE 2x1h 2x2h (time) 2x5h (time) SDE SPE Speed bound 3x30m 3x2 speed snatch (155#) 3x2 heavy squat 3x4 bench GE Warm up (8x30m knee lifts) GS circuit x15 *this would be a session suited for 3x/ week. Very high sessional load. If I m trying to really get my contacts in, I might reduce loads of the other categories. Program 1: Sprint CE 6x30m SDE 3x10m heavy sled SPE 5x2 heavy squat GE Boo lifting circuit Program 2: Sprint Hurdling CE 6xH: 2-1, 2-2, 2-h SDE x SPE 3x4 bench GE Boo arcturus Above would be too little load. I would either need to add more load to each exercise (SPE 1 exercise to 3 exercise), or add another session. I ve added another session below. Program 1: Sprint CE 6x30m SDE 3x10m heavy sled SPE 5x2 heavy squat GE Boo lifting circuit Program 2: Sprint Hurdling CE 6xH: 2-1, 2-2, 2-h SDE x SPE 3x4 bench GE Boo arcturus Program 3: Sprint CE 4x30m, 2x40m(20,20fly) SDE 3x20m light sled SPE 4x2 Snatch GE Boo lifting circuit

4 (1,off,2,off repeat) Days P1 Off P2 Off P1 Off P2 Contact (1,2, off,off repeat) Days P1 P2 Off Off P1 P2 Contact Both above are the same (2touches per week). Are there implications for work/recovery ratios that are better in the second one? Ie. Big Hit, more recovery, Another big hit? Only know by trial. Need to track performances for the second one compared to the first. The second one, if it does work better, should yield higher performances in contact #2. What about: Days P1 Off P2 P1 P2 Off Off Contact This wouldn t make sense. Quality would be really low to get through that second wave. A (1,2,off,off) achieves the same density in the short and long run, without incurring the same damage to quality. I lean toward the first one, because it is logical. Density is appropriate with 4 sessions in one week, and with the 48 hours in between. Quality will be appropriate as enough rest is given in between. The second one is favourable because it allows for more rest, which I find is a good option for me. My session loads are not high enough to not be done back to back. (6 runs+6 runs in 2 days). With two days off, I can come back really well rested and get after it again. Picking up on the rest needed from option #2, I suggest this formation: 11am P1 P1 Off Off Off P1 P1 6pm P2 Off Off Off P2 Contact 1 2,1 3 4,2 I ve identified a necessary 4 day gap during late comp to really achieve the best performances. I am a guy that can t do much work, but needs more rest (fasttwitch bias). This seems like an option made for me. P1 is quality, but not enough that I can t come back for day 2 (re: stim on Monday, dev on Tuesday). Day 2 will be a tough workout but if quality can maintain high for both workouts, I can really create steep work/recovery ratios. With this scheme, if quality can stay up, 180mx4=720m of speed volume from the 30m. Density is also much higher even though a lot of rest is taken. Is that not the goal, increase density while

5 making sure my individual needs (high recovery) is given? It also hits the goal of mine to accumulate more speed work. However I organize volume, and the number of sessions, and how I lay it out on the calendar with specific considerations for work/recovery does not matter as long as I make sure my specific measurables increase. All these variables can change. For they might not work. But as long as I can increase the specific measurable, I have something to work on, and tracking feeling for each particular exercise will let me know if there is transfer. When I run a 1.04s interval in a 353 overspeed drill, I have a run time of 0.74s, and a hurdle clearance of 0.30s (39 ). My best for a flying 30 is 3.11s. That is an average of 1.03 in the 10m segment. That is 9.7m/s. Without doubt, as many people tell me, the lowest hanging fruit, the sensible next step to development is to get faster. I did not do enough sprinting when I was a developmental athlete. It is the hardest factor to catch up. That is why I want my first series of developmental cycles to place an emphasis on getting my top speed up. The golden standard for hurdle interval time is 1.00s. If a man can achieve that in race conditions, and suffers little decay through to the end, they are an elite hurdler. My best in training hitherto recorded is from H2-H3 with 1 in, a 1.07s. 1.07s to 1.00s represents an increase of 7% in physical condition. For 1.07s, the run time was air time. Air time cannot change much in practice over 39. So that 7% increase must be taken up by the run time *1.07=0.70s. The key performance indicators are now unconcealed. Me Current 1% increase 2% increase 3% increase 1 in in practice 0.76 RT Assuming 0.31HC, splits would be: 1.07s Hurdle run time will increase by lessening ground contact time. This will be accomplished by increasing sprint capacity (ability to reduce the time necessary to overcome necessary ground reaction forces on ground contact). Sprint speed is a must. If I can improve my top speed (fly 10), I will increase the ability to achieve equal displacement in the hurdles (9.14m) in less time.

6 Me Current 1% 2% 3% 4% m/s 9.7m/s 9.8m/s 9.9m/s 10m/s 10.1m/s s The first PDSF I want to establish the relationship between fly 10 increase, and run time at H3-4, or H4-5 increase. How much can I expect to increase fly 10 capability in this first cycle? How much can run time be increased? Expectations I think I am a type 3. My performances generally stay the same in a nonwaveload. 2 definite examples surface. A. Power Clean B during winter Break With A, I could hit 265lbs every session, and did not have to make a concession. After 2-3 workouts, I had to drop it to 255 to have a good workout. It is nonwaveload. 4x1 scheme with daily max. prescription. With B, I hit 1.035, 1.041, This was across 3 weeks, one session a week. The subjective feeling goes down linearly. Yet on the third one I could still keep interval time the same, even though I was hitting a lot of hurdles (the mechanics of the drill might affect the recording). In both examples, subjective feeling decreases, yet performance stays the same. I had never gone past a 3 rd session, but I would expect 4 and 5 th session to stay the same, and an increase with the non-waveload. With my subjective feeling, I feel like that I could really bounce back within 3 sessions after feeling like crap (session#3). I don t generally stay in a slump for more than 2-3 sessions (ref: 2017summer maladaptation point). This is what I expect then with my complex program. 1, 2, 3 = performances stay the same, subjective feeling goes from good to terrible on 3 rd. 4,5 = maladaptation,, sprints might start dropping in performance (as they are high energy so they go first), will start hitting hurdles extremely poorly, hurdling could stay the same. 6-7 = drop. 8-10/11=increase. This seems like the zone where I can really grow. I ve never seen an increase for more than 3 sessions (2015=3 meets of linear increase / 2017=3 meets of increase, 14.30, 14.32, 14.11, 14.20). Once I hit peak condition, I will bring the cycle a little past familiar territory. What if I can peak for 5 sessions after the drops? I will change into a wash after I plateau/drop from PC.

7 Let s say 12 sessions. 2 programs, so 22 contacts are needed. If I do my conservative periodization, it will take me 5.5 weeks, with 4 touches a week. If doing my extreme scheme, with 6 contacts a week, it will take me 3 and a half weeks. With 5.5 weeks, over 110mh, I would expect an increase of 1.5-2% (14.60>14.38/14.31). That s a performance increase of 0.20s. Distributed over each interval, 11 sections, that s.018s (0.20/11) for each segment roughly = % increase. That increase seems like a lot. 8.29m/s to 8.44m/s. Possible? I like PJ Vazel s analysis. He s produced a table of normative interval times for goal race times s in the 110mh has a top speed of 1.07s. 1% increase of 13.95s = 13.81s. What does PJ say about the top speed for 13.81s? 1.06s. Whatever percentage of gains made in the 110mh will also be gifted for the top speed. 5% increase for = 13.29s. Top speed from PJ s chart is % increase of 1.07s (top speed for 13.95)? 1.02s. I know from my previous development, that a season could give me about 3%. How is 5 week s work supposed to match 4 months of preparation? An advantage with the non-waveload program is that you can establish cause and effect. There is no guesswork. I don t have to waste time guessing recovery amount, and adaptation. I just run the program until I see a reaction. If it is ineffective, I make changes for the next cycle. In short, with this system, I can be really productive in a much shorter period of time. There were times during this season s training that I thought I could have really reacted to training. But I never realized the development because changes happened either in the exercises, volume, or density. When I felt good, sometimes a heavy weights session might be prescribed, thereby dropping my status once again. Or- sometimes weight sessions were lifted, leading another change. With this system, I can really roll with the set up, exercises, volume, density, until I react. This system is simple. I get headaches and imposter bias when I look at the Charlie Francis graphs of waveloading max weights, maintenance weights, plyometrics, sprinting, each category peak lines up with the trough of another category it boggles my mind and begs the inadequacy of my ability to understand how all training elements fit together. I prefer simple, non-waveloading. Let s say 5.5 weeks of PDSF1, which yields me 1% improvement. In a regular preparation + peaking scheme, I have 16 weeks (4months). In this time, I could fit 3 PDSF, equal to 3% if each one yielded 1%. A WC will take up 2 weeks =18.5weeks. If I do my extreme scheme, 3.5weeks required for each PDSF, I could get 3 PSF in 14 weeks; save 2 for WC. This system is so much more precise. I feel with the modern training schemes, a lot of it is wasted by guesswork of prescription: training just to train.

8 Final expectations: In 5.5 weeks, I will establish at least a 1% training gain. My 1.03s in the 10m will go to My run time of 0.76 will turn to I will be using 30m, so I will time 20-30m. Day1/PC should be 1.01 I expect. My run time will be measured using frame analysis with 240fps capacity.

Short Sprints and Hurdles

Short Sprints and Hurdles Training Philosophy and Implementation Brandon Hon Director of Sprints, Hurdles and Relays Florida State University Thank you for the opportunity to share 9 years at University